Canadian news magazine Maclean's photoshopped George Bush into the familiar black beret, mustache and pseudo-military garb that defined the late Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein. This photo illustration accompanied a September 20 cover story that claimed Bush is the new Saddam because he's “reaching out the the late dictator's henchmen.”
In "How Bush Became the New Saddam," writer Patrick Graham described a decaying civilization that is doomed to fail in this rambling, disjointed article. He traveled around Iraq separately from the US military and even criticized journalists embedded with them because they “learn mostly about Americans...and end up sounding like a visiting columnist for the New York Times“ (my emphasis throughout). Ah yes, Canadians wouldn't want to echo that notoriously pro-military, pro-war and pro-American voice of the NY Times.
He jumped on the “Anbar Awakening,” and noted that “[m]any of America's new allies are former insurgents and Saddam Hussein loyalists...who only a short while ago were routinely called terrorists, 'anti-Iraq fighters,' and 'Baathist dead-enders.' ” Cooperating with the mutual enemies of Al Qaeda makes Bush the new Saddam? I guess since America cooperates with Canada as well, than that means Bush is also the new Pierre Trudeau?
Graham labeled the “over-hyped success the Anbar Awakening,” calling the milestones of cooperation in that province “yard-pebbles” and “inch-dust.” Sure, it's better to ignore a means to ending hostilities that will allow troops to withdraw and ultimately reduce loss of life. And Bush is supposed to be the one who doesn't understand nuance and shades of grey?
Not willing to give an inch on the successes in Iraq, Graham found fault in everything from Bush's photo-op meet and greet with various Anbar sheiks to the US sending terrorists to Syria for interrogation:
“Come to Damascus—we can drive from here and the road is safe,” Ahmed said. He listed the various tribal militias controlling the 450-km road through Anbar province from the Syrian border to Falluja that could protect us. It seemed to be typical of the recent over-hyped success of the Anbar Awakening that you would have to fly from Baghdad to Damascus, and then drive six hours back across the desert, to get only 40 minutes outside Baghdad in order to see it for yourself...Ahmed said that when he and his “troop” (his quaint word for what sounded death-squadish to me) captured al-Qaeda fighters around Falluja, they shipped the leaders to the border for interrogation by Syrian intelligence. So far, he’d sent 12. You can’t blame him—even the Americans send suspects to Syria when they want them tortured. Just ask Maher Arar.
Graham legitimately documented the danger and violence that still exists in Iraq, but nowhere in his article was he willing to concede anything positive about the country's progress. Graham's one-sided portrayal of Iraq made the New York Times' coverage look Fair and Balanced.
Lynn is a contributor to NewsBusters. Contact her at tvisgoodforyou2 AT yahoo DOT com



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I guess we must pity them -
September 21, 2007 - 10:58 ET by TruthMongerI guess we must pity them - any other ideas out there...?
TM, Just ignore Canada.
September 21, 2007 - 11:10 ET by LeonTM,
Just ignore Canada. They're only getting lippy b/c their dollar's trading almost equal to ours.
What surprises me is that
September 21, 2007 - 16:24 ET by BDWhat surprises me is that for the all the money WE have sunk into their defense without a significant input of their own, they should have had a stonger loonie YEEAAARRSS ago!
I see... So if Bush pursues
September 21, 2007 - 10:59 ET by fosstenI see... So if Bush pursues military victory instead of talks, he's a bass-ackwards warmongering cowboy, but if he tries to make peace and unify differing factions, he's the new Saddam?
Can't win with these libtards.
Forget 911, I dial 9MM.
commitment problems
September 21, 2007 - 11:08 ET by TruthMongerno surprise there - libs can never win anything
what was the leftard logic for cozying up to Castro, Kim Dong Ill, Chavez, Al Queda again?
Wasn't Bush supposed to "reach out" and "understand" and "get a dalogue going?"
A hallmark of liberals I've noticed on NB is the absolute inability to commit to a position. How much electricity do we burn here everyday trying to pin them down on JUST ONE FREAKING SIMPLE ANSWER TO A QUESTION?
These people really do have a pyschosis. Their brains are completely FUBAR...
Yes
September 21, 2007 - 11:12 ET by Lynn DavidsonI see... So if Bush pursues military victory instead of talks, he's a bass-ackwards warmongering cowboy, but if he tries to make peace and unify differing factions, he's the new Saddam?
That was certainly the gist of the article.
Loaded
September 21, 2007 - 11:03 ET by allanfThe title "How Bush became the new Saddaam" is as loaded as Carter's "Palestine, Peace not Apartheid". It is a contemptable statement on a par with the moveon.org advertisement.
What Graham seemed to have learned is that Iraq is a tribal society, and for a period tribal insurgents cooperated in attacks against American forces. Now, they have turned on the al-Qaeda fighters.
These tribes have passed for the Western version of "law and order" in these areas for hundreds of years. I'm glad we are finally cooperating with them. I don't think those observations of Graham are particularly insightful.
Isn't it supposed to make Bush look bad?
September 21, 2007 - 11:09 ET by Lame CherryLiberals never do get it right, because looking at Bush my judgment is he looks suave and manly. Women will swoon over this and I think Jorge el Busto should get himself a Bradley and cruise around with his UN black beret and sport a thick moustache.
Perhaps then he will bust eastern Canada literally in their liberal haven and smack northern Mexico of it's socialism. Those areas opened up as new American frontiers would spark an economic bonanza worth trillions in development as Canucks and Mexicans have deep problems with prospering.
Since Bush is being accused of all of this.......let him play the role for the next 2 years, especially in dealing with Iran so there is no more military love thy muslim, but killing enemies efficiently and installing the quivering friends to lead these muslim lands into the peaceful nations of properity.
Viva la Busto!
*HIC IACET ARTORIVS REX QVONDAM REXQVE FVTVRVS
Well the left should LOVE Bush now...!
September 21, 2007 - 11:19 ET by TruthMonger...If he's turned into an evil dictator now - like Castro, Chavez, etc does that mean this is the end of BDS?!
We must have the greatest health care in the world now! Life under Bush is peaceful. The people just adore him. He could even be re-elected now with 99% of the vote just like Saddam was, and then maybe have some cushy love-fest interviews with Diane Sawyer and company...
really looking forward to this:)
You gotta admit, that's a
September 21, 2007 - 13:09 ET by dscottYou gotta admit, that's a snappy outfit. I wonder what Laura thinks of the mustache? <sarcasm>
dscott's postulate: The degree to which someone exaggerates or deceives is inversely proportional to the merit of the advocated position.
Yeah ... Have a hard time
September 21, 2007 - 11:14 ET by drillanwrYeah ... Have a hard time taking a "publication" seriously that puts the leader of the most powerful nation in the world on the cover with a bloated, drunken, pop-tart, failing-mom ...
I suppose it's original, anyway ... He's moved from "Hitler" to "Saddam" ... Wonder when Bush will be depicted as Iranian Pres. Ahmabignutjob, or Jabba The Chavez?
Good observation about the
September 22, 2007 - 03:03 ET by mostlymoderateGood observation about the pop-tart, failing mom! I didn't see that in the corner until just now. lol. And I thought *our* media sucked. Maybe the stereotypes are true: Canadian's are beer-swilling, dope-smoking idiots and panzies.
SLOW MEDIA BIAS WEEK?
September 21, 2007 - 11:27 ET by CrashIf we have to sneak across the Canadian border to dig up articles on media bias ... it must be a slow news week. We might as well post recipes for moose stew.
Go crawl back under your bridge, troll.
September 21, 2007 - 12:18 ET by Dave RWhen I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
Daver...actually, it's been a heck of a Bias'ed week..
September 21, 2007 - 12:38 ET by JayTeeMRC has been covered up this week, keeping up with the False Press....
Chris matthead jump the gun (along with the Shark) on the "Don't Tase me 'bro" story was the Best...Truly following the form of the DUKE LaCross story, #2 wasChrissy getting disected by Laura, and if you left the NB site for 1/2 a day this week, you couldn't catch up.....
What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ? David Foote GoE
JayTee,
September 21, 2007 - 12:43 ET by Dave R...and if you left the NB site for 1/2 a day this week, you couldn't catch up.....
LOL-I left for a whole day. Now I'm hopelessy lost. Not to mention behind.....
When I'm president, privatization is off the table because it's not the answer to anything.-Hillary Rodham, September 3, 2007 AARP Legislative Conference.
I abhor the leftist
September 21, 2007 - 11:31 ET by Free ThinkerI abhor the leftist media and its attempts to demonize the US and its leaders, but I probably pity even more the people who buy into this garbage. Items like this show just how intellectually bankrupt the left is.
I wonder if it is the cold
September 21, 2007 - 11:31 ET by Subsailor599I wonder if it is the cold weather that causes mental illness.
Canada is the new
September 21, 2007 - 12:12 ET by mattmCanada is the new France
Macleans is the new National Inquirer
Graham is the new Goebbels
On behalf of conservative
September 21, 2007 - 11:43 ET by Tom1969caOn behalf of conservative Canadians across our land, please allow me to be so bold as to offer our apologies to our friends to the south.
Also, please don't compare Bush to Pierre Trudeau; he was one of the most socialist Prime Ministers of my lifetime! Better choices would be Brian Mulroney (who forged close friendships with Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, and despite being an 'evil conservative' was recently voted Canada's "greenest" Prime Minister) or Robert Stanfield (who led our Conservative Party but never won the Prime Ministership, prompting historians to label him, "The greatest Prime Minister Canada never had!" )
~~~
If you don't stand behind our troops, feel free to stand in front of them!
These liberals never
September 21, 2007 - 12:02 ET by rbosqueThese liberals never demonized Saddam. So now they demonize Bush in a Saddam suit? Does that mean they like Bush?
Canadian anti-US Mania
September 21, 2007 - 21:52 ET by algoa456I write from Canada - the Maclean's story is symptomatic of the deep anti-US malaise in Canada. The media, particularly the state Canadian Bias Corporation, the education system (the day after 9/11 the professor where my daughter studied announced with glee that the American bastards deserved it), the churches (and mosques of course), the business people and a good percentage of the chattering classes provide a constant anti-American drum beat in Canadian lives.
I have had to explain to my children that indeed good things come out of the US - at first they did not believe it since schools here - with few exceptions teach that America is the root of all things bad in the world.
Also as Asian and Middle-Eastern immigrants flood into the country (Toronto is now less than 50% white) be assured that they too are taught quite clearly that America is the evil.
It is true that Canada is a pip squeek of a country (though swaggering at the moment because of the dollar parity), but do not underestimate its 'goody two shoes' image in the world and the terrible harm it does to its Southern neighbor to which it owes so much.
It hurts me when traveling in the US. I announce I am from Canada and decent well meaning Americans - ordinary Joes- are pleased to see me and always tell me how much they like Canada. Of course, it is impossible to tell them the reality back home that the large population centers like Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver go out of their way to say bad things about the US. And as my American friends have found when visiting many 'educated' Canadians are postively rude towards them unless they pour scorn on Bush.
For balance I should add that we currently have a minority government more sympathetic to the US that understand the threats faced by the West, but that is more because the leftist parties are in disarray than a reflection of the majority of the population.
As I said above Macleans magazine, subsidized by the state, is a fine reflection of the situation.
There are some Anti American
September 22, 2007 - 05:57 ET by Lancasters Saved UsThere are some Anti American Canadians no doubt. I would think proportionally it is about equal to the Anti American Americans living in America (USA). Strange.
In Afghanistan we are pulling some weight , as losses are proportionally higher for the Canadian troops than the US troops in Iraq from my rough math. We have lost 70 in the last year and a half out of I believe a force of 2500, most of the deaths occur in Khandahar. My best friend's brother just shipped out last week. Still, our contribution is not materially large, nor is our military currently equipped for any real war waging. At any rate, the current minority government has started to turn the ship around (after WW2, Canada had the 3rd largest Navy in the World). It will take time, but I hope we restore the pride of the Canadian military. Few Americans I have met seem well versed in the major contribution Canda made in the two world wars. We were a great nation then, and there is hope we will be again. The Macleans cover is a disgrace to Journalism. It is so late to the party of Bush Bashers. I think Prime Minister Harper is about the best Prime Minister Canda has had in my lifetime. I hope he pans out and proves he has principal . There hasn't been an Honest Prime Minister from Quebec in my lifetime...Mulroney included. Sorry, but it is just the liberal media. They think that is their job.